Swiss Referendum Requires Voters to Decide Between Guns or Globalism

[Swordsmyth]

On May 19, Swiss citizens will go to the polls to vote on a referendum that would decide whether or not to allow restrictions on the Alpine country’s gun policies.
It might seems odd to most readers that a country renowned for its relaxed gun laws would consider a tightening those laws.
What readers should know is that Switzerland didn’t just draw this decision out of thin air. No, the Swiss people will be deciding whether to adopt or to refuse the European Union’s revised Firearms Directive.
According to the European Union’s website explaining the mandates of the Firearms Directive, the following additional restrictions on the right to own firearms are imposed:
A ban of certain semi-automatic firearms: These include automatic firearms transformed into semi-automatic firearms, long semi-automatic firearms of length less than 60cm, long semi-automatic firearms with loading devices of more than 10 rounds, and short semi-automatic firearms with a loading device of more than 20 rounds.
Regulation of acoustic weapons: An acoustic or salute weapon is an active weapon transformed to only shoot blanks for use in theatre or cinema, e.g. Such weapons can be easily re-transformed into fully active firearms. In the future, acoustic and salute weapon can still be used in a theatre or in movies, subject to declaration, authorisation or licence depending on the category they belonged to before transformation.
Regulation of alarm and signal weapons: An alarm and signal weapon is a device with a cartridge holder which is designed to fire only blanks, irritants, other active substances or pyrotechnic signalling rounds and which is not capable of being converted to expel a shot, bullet or projectile by the action of a combustible propellant.
Inclusion of museums and collectors in the scope of the Directive. The existing Directive does not cover collectors. In the future, collectors and museums will be treated like any civilian firearms owner. They will have the possibility to acquire category A firearms but only under strict conditions.
Deactivated weapons are included in the scope of the Directive. Regulating the deactivated weapons is now subject to declaration to national authorities. Stricter rules for the deactivation of firearms were also adopted.
Stricter conditions for the online acquisition of firearms to better control the acquisition of firearms via Internet, pieces thereof or ammunition through the Internet.
Clearer rules on marking of firearms to improve traceability: Member States need to ensure that any firearm or part placed on the market has been marked and registered in national computerised data-filing systems.
Conditions for medical tests: In future, all Member States will have to put in place a system of medical checks for the authorisation to acquire firearms. Member States will define the details concerning medical checks.
Additionally, the original directive requires that all EU countries “deactivate firearms in their territory provided they have taken all necessary measures to apply the common deactivation standards and techniques provided for by this Regulation.”

Basically, to ban or not to ban, that is the question the Swiss will be deciding.
Is it worth surrendering their self-defense — and a substantial part of their sovereignty — to the European Union?
Why would the Swiss even entertain such a shrinking of their natural right to defend themselves? English-language Swiss media explains the seemingly inexplicable:
The referendum on the issue is being held because the Swiss Shooting Interest Group, supported by the conservative Swiss People’s Party (SVP) launched a popular initiative calling for Swiss voters to reject the EU Firearms Directive.
The committee behind the initiative collected the necessary number of signatures to trigger a referendum under Switzerland’s unique system of direct democracy.
In other words, gun owners in Switzerland worried that without an explicit rejection of the EU’s Firearm Directive, provisions of that “law” might slowly find their way incorporated into Switzerland’s domestic legislation.
The Swiss Shooting Interest Group is so concerned about the creep of gun restrictions into their country that the information they’ve published to explain their opposition calls the EU’s Firearm Directive “an “EU disarmament diktat,” describing it as a direct attack on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Of particular concern to Swiss gun owners — estimated to number over 2,300,000 — is Article 17 of the EU Firearms Directive, which reads:
By 14 September 2020, and every 5 years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the application of this Directive, including a fitness check of its provisions, accompanied, if appropriate, by legislative proposals concerning, in particular, the categories of firearms in Annex I and issues related to the implementation of the system for the European firearms pass, to marking and the impacts of new technologies such as 3D printing, the use of QR code and the use of radio-frequency identification (RFID).
No wonder they are worried!
Look at all that one provision would require: Every 5 years each signatory country would have to prove to the European Parliament that it is implementing the prohibitions established by this regulation.
Also, the countries would have to demonstrate that they are cracking down on 3D printing of weapons and ammunition and that they are using RFID tags in order to enable tracking of guns and ammunition from factory to end user.
According to Swiss media, the government of Switzerland warns that should the referendum to reject the new gun restrictions pass, the country could experience severe economic repercussions:
The government says this could cost the Swiss economy billions of francs a year while the Swiss Federal Office of Police warns that Switzerland would be deprived of key security and crime information accessible via the Schengen Information System.
Losing Schengen status would also have a knock-on effect on immigration because, as a non-Schengen country, Switzerland would cease to be covered by the so-called Dublin Regulation. Under the Dublin rules, asylum seekers can only apply to one EU member state for protection.
If Switzerland were no longer covered by these rules, there could be a spike in asylum requests because failed asylum seekers from other EU countries would then be able to apply to Switzerland as a next port of call.
In other words, protect gun rights and be flooded by asylum-seeking immigrants or accept the new firearm restrictions and enjoy protection against the wave of immigrants washing across the rest of Europe.
Sadly, this dilemma seems to have convinced Swiss voters to exchange gun rights for economic and border security. As Swiss press reports:
Close to two thirds of voters (65 percent) say they are “definitely in favour” or “generally in favour” of Switzerland’s adoption of tougher gun laws, according to a survey run by Gfs Bern at the end of April. That is just one percentage point lower than an earlier poll carried out at the end of March.
Sunday, May 19 will be an historic day in Switzerland. Let’s hope that the voters have a last-minute change of heart and decide not to offer their right to own weapons on the altar of European integration.


https://www.thenewamerican.com/world...s-or-globalism

[timosman]

What happens if they don't vote the right way?

[Swordsmyth]

What happens if they don't vote the right way?

According to Swiss media, the government of Switzerland warns that should the referendum to reject the new gun restrictions pass, the country could experience severe economic repercussions:

The government says this could cost the Swiss economy billions of francs a year while the Swiss Federal Office of Police warns that Switzerland would be deprived of key security and crime information accessible via the Schengen Information System.
Losing Schengen status would also have a knock-on effect on immigration because, as a non-Schengen country, Switzerland would cease to be covered by the so-called Dublin Regulation. Under the Dublin rules, asylum seekers can only apply to one EU member state for protection.

If Switzerland were no longer covered by these rules, there could be a spike in asylum requests because failed asylum seekers from other EU countries would then be able to apply to Switzerland as a next port of call.

But they will probably try to make them keep voting until they get it "right".

[AngryCanadian]

But they will probably try to make them keep voting until they get it "right".

Exactly.
Then forced to accpet Diversity.

[Zippyjuan]

A bit long to post here but it does try to explain things. https://www.thelocal.ch/20190513/wha...rol-referendum

Just a few bits:

What is at stake?

A lot. In the run-up to the referendum, the Swiss government has highlighted the fact that, under the terms of the EU–Swiss Schengen agreement, Switzerland could, in theory, be bundled out of the Schengen family if it fails to adopt the new gun rules.

The government says this could cost the Swiss economy billions of francs a year while the Swiss Federal Office of Police warns that Switzerland would be deprived of key security and crime information accessible via the Schengen Information System.

Losing Schengen status would also have a knock-on effect on immigration because, as a non-Schengen country, Switzerland would cease to be covered by the so-called Dublin Regulation. Under the Dublin rules, asylum seekers can only apply to one EU member state for protection. If Switzerland were no longer covered by these rules, there could be a spike in asylum requests because failed asylum seekers from other EU countries would then be able to apply to Switzerland as a next port of call.

Complicating the picture is the fact that Swiss relations with the EU are already strained because of protracted and often bad-natured negotiations over the future of bilateral relations between Bern and Brussels. Switzerland's bargaining power is unlikely to be given a boost if the country's voters reject the EU's new gun rules.

But how does the Swiss government respond to the concerns of gun owners?

The says that Switzerland’s shooting culture is not threatened by adoption of the EU directive and notes that the county has already been granted a number of key concessions by the EU.

These concessions, outlined in Article 6 of the EU Firearms Directive, mean that Swiss soldiers can continue to take home their service weapons, which have high magazine capacity, at the end of military service.

In addition, anyone in Switzerland who currently owns these types of weapons (specifically the SIG SG 510 and SIG SG 550 assault rifles) can keep hold of them, although they will be required to register the guns with cantonal authorities within three years.

People who want to buy weapons with high magazine capacity for target shooting purposes will also be able to do so in future, although they will need to get an “exemption permit” to use what is essentially a banned weapon in the EU.

To obtain such a permit, owners of these guns will need to prove that they are members of a shooting club or that they are regular sports shooters (with ‘regular’ in this case meaning they have gone target shooting at least five times in the previous five years).

However, shooting enthusiasts say that the new rules are much more restrictive. They will lead to a red-tape nightmare and a decline in the number of sports shooters in Switzerland.

How are people likely to vote?

All indications are that Swiss voters will back the revised EU gun rules.

Close to two thirds of voters (65 percent) say they are “definitely in favour” or “generally in favour” of Switzerland’s adoption of tougher gun laws, according to a survey run by Gfs Bern at the end of April. That is just one percentage point lower than an earlier poll carried out at the end of March.

[Swordsmyth]

Swiss voters on Sunday approved a measure to tighten the Alpine nation's gun laws, bringing the country in line with many of its European partners despite the objections of local gun owners, Swiss media reported, citing official results.Switzerland's public broadcaster said more than 63% of voters nationwide agreed to align with European Union firearms rules adopted two years ago after deadly attacks in France, Belgium, Germany and Britain.

Switzerland, unlike many other European nations, allows veterans of its obligatory military service for men to take home their service weapons after tours of duty.
The Swiss proposal, among other things, requires regular training on the use of firearms, special waivers to own some semi-automatic weapons and serial number tracking system for key parts of some guns. Gun owners would have to register any weapons not already registered within three years, and keep a registry of their gun collections.


Opponents insist that such changes will violate Switzerland's constitution and do little to fight extremism or crime. They say the weapons used in recent attacks in Europe weren't obtained legally. They argue it will crack down mainly on lawful gun owners in Switzerland and ram through what they perceive as the latest diktat from Brussels on the rich country.
Jean-Luc Addor, a Swiss People's Party lawmaker from the southwestern Valais region, said adopting the EU directive would be "unjust, freedom-killing, useless, dangerous, and above all, anti-Swiss."
"With no effect on the fight against terrorism, it will only hit honest, law-abiding citizens who possess legal weapons (so, us!)," he wrote on his website. "It's the epitome of injustice."
Switzerland hasn't faced major extremist attacks like those that have hit France, Belgium, Britain and Germany in recent years, leaving scores dead.
Pre-vote polls suggested most of the major political parties — except for the populist Swiss People's Party — were in favor, with support strongest among Socialists and Greens.
The rift on the issue has fallen largely along a rural-urban divide, with city dwellers generally more inclined to back the EU directive.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/switzerland-v...141152587.html

[Zippyjuan]

Swiss gun laws are already pretty strict. Yes, after military service they can take their gun home (with approval). But the ammo cannot be stored in the home. They aren't the free gun culture that the NRA sometimes tries to portray them as.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

Although it is still possible for a former soldier to buy his firearm after he finishes military service, he must provide a justification for keeping the weapon and apply for a permit.

When I meet Mathias, a PhD student and serving officer, at his apartment in a snowy suburb of Zurich, I realise the rules have got stricter than I imagined. Mathias keeps his army pistol in the guest room of his home, in a desk drawer hidden under the printer paper. It is a condition of the interview that I don't give his surname or hint at his address.

"I do as the army advises and I keep the barrel separately from my pistol," he explains seriously. "I keep the barrel in the basement so if anyone breaks into my apartment and finds the gun, it's useless to them."

He shakes out the gun holster. "And we don't get bullets any more," he adds. "The Army doesn't give ammunition now - it's all kept in a central arsenal." This measure was introduced by Switzerland's Federal Council in 2007.

Mathias carefully puts away his pistol and shakes his head firmly when I ask him if he feels safer having a gun at home, explaining that even if he had ammunition, he would not be allowed to use it against an intruder.

"The gun is not given to me to protect me or my family," he says. "I have been given this gun by my country to serve my country - and for me it is an honour to take care of it. I think it is a good thing for the state to give this responsibility to people.

In America then, gun ownership is about self-defence whereas in Switzerland it is seen more in terms of national security. To many traditionalists, a gun in the home has become a metaphor for an independent, well-fortified Switzerland which has helped to keep the country out of two world wars.

Heavy machine guns and automatic weapons are banned, as are silencers

In most cases the buyer needs a weapon acquisition permit, issued by the cantonal police

This will be refused if the applicant has a criminal record, an addiction or a psychiatric problem

A special permit is needed to carry a gun in public - and is usually issued only to people who work in security, once they have passed theoretical and practical exams

The army is not the only entity to have a tradition with guns however. About 600,000 Swiss - many of them children - belong to shooting clubs.

On the second weekend in September each year, about 4,000 Zurich girls and boys, aged 12 to 16, take part in Knabenschiessen, a rifle marksmanship contest. The winner is honoured with the title King of the Marksmen.

"Never point your gun anywhere but the target or the ceiling," instructor Michael Merki warns me as he gives me my first air rifle lesson at a Zurich shooting range. "Safety must come first." He steadies my hand.

It has taken a good five minutes to unpack Michael's guns. I count four padlocks on his carrying case.

"Shooting instructors at rifle clubs always control who is shooting," he says. And all ammunition bought at the club has to be used there.

"When the shooting is finished and the person wants to leave the club, the instructor will look to see how many bullets have been shot and will demand the rest are given back."

Swiss citizens - for example hunters, or those who shoot as a sport - can get a permit to buy guns and ammunition, unless they have a criminal record, or police deem them unsuitable on psychiatric or security grounds. But hunters and sportsmen are greatly outnumbered by those keeping army guns - which again illustrates the difference between Switzerland and the US.

Prof Killias cannot hide his anger with those in America who use Switzerland to illustrate their argument that more gun ownership would deter or stop violence.

"We don't have a gun culture!" he snaps, waving his hand dismissively.

"I'm always amazed how the National Rifle Association in America points to Switzerland - they make it sound as if it was part of southern Texas!" he says.

"We have guns at home, but they are kept for peaceful purposes. There is no point taking the gun out of your home in Switzerland because it is illegal to carry a gun in the street. To shoot someone who just looks at you in a funny way - this is not Swiss culture!"

Street violence has gone up in recent years in Switzerland but there hasn't been an increase in gun-related incidents.

[AngryCanadian]

Swiss got cucked.

Opponents insist that such changes will violate Switzerland's constitution and do little to fight extremism or crime. They say the weapons used in recent attacks in Europe weren't obtained legally. They argue it will crack down mainly on lawful gun owners in Switzerland and ram through what they perceive as the latest diktat from Brussels on the rich country.

The Opponents are right though. These anti gun laws never due target the real criminals.

[oyarde]

They will fold , the balls were clipped long ago .

[swissaustrian]

Thanks for posting this.
This was quite certain to pass, because the gun rules are entangled with a larger nexus of contracts that allow the free movement of EU citizens to Switzerland and vice versa ("Schengen").
The current rules are not horrible, but there is a legal "timebomb" embedded in these rules by which after a couple of year rules automatically get stricter and stricter.
Unregistered gun ownership is still very high, though, due to the existing stock of older weapons and ammunition.
Also, the crime rate here is not as low as it is because of guns. It is rather that the root causes of serious violent crime dont exist to the same extent they do in some parts of the US. There is no meaningful drug war, addicts are not treated as criminals. There is almost no poverty/homelessness. Foreigners/immigrants are forced to learn one of the official languages and their kids are integrated quite well in schools. Mass shootings and terrorism are an unknown phenomenon.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

They aren't the free gun culture that the NRA sometimes tries to portray them as.

Link?